FEB. 7, 1837.}

Mr. CALHOUN observed that the cases referred to in the resolution presented one of the greatest outrages ever committed on the rights of individuals by a civilized Power. The resolution proposed to ask from the Presi. dent copies of any correspondence that may have taken place with the British Government relative to the seizare, by the British authorities, of the slaves who were carried as passengers in two American vessels. One of these vessels had sailed from Wilmington, in the State of North Carolina, for New Orleans, having on board some slaves, the property of a gentleman removing from that State to the State of Mississippi; and she was wrecked near New Providence, where the slaves were forcibly seized and detained. The Legislature of North Carolina had, in consequence, expressed their disapprobation of such unwarrantable conduct, and unanimously passed resolutions calling upon the General Government to institute an inquiry into the matter. The other case was that of a vessel bound from Alexandria, in the Dis trict of Columbia, to Charleston, South Carolina. Having met with very stormy weather, she was forced into the port of Bermuda, where the British authorities took possession of the slaves, and set them at liberty. He insisted that there was not a clearer constitutional question than that a vessel sailing from one port of the United States to another was as free from search as the territory of the United States itself; and when a vessel was forced by stress of weather into a foreign port, she was entitled to commiseration on account of her situation. The claims of humanity, he held, were, in such cases, to be superadded to the laws of nations. These points being so clear, he was astonished that outrages of this kind had been committed for the last three years. He did not doubt, for a moment, but that the Executive had done his duty, and exercised his accustomed vigilance, in reference to these matters. But still he (Mr. C.) was at a loss to perceive how it happened, after such a lapse of time, that the slaves had not been restored, nor any compensation made to the owners. Now, this resolulution he had introduced for the purpose of getting information on the subject, and in order that justice might be done to our citizens.

At the suggestion of Mr. GRUNDY,

Mr. CALHOUN modified his resolution, so as to insert in it the words "provided the Presivent does not deem it incompatible with the public interests;" and the resolution, thus amended, was adopted.

DISTRIBUTION OF BOOKS.

The resolution authorizing the distribution, among the new Senators, of nineteen copies of the American State Papers, published by Messrs. Gales & Seaton, coming up for consideration

Mr. KING, of Georgia, moved to refer it to the Com. mittee on the Library.

Mr. PRESTON objected to the motion. It was a question, he said, of mere distribution; and, if an inqui ry beyond that were instituted, it did not properly belong to the Library Committee.

Mr. GRUNDY was opposed to any reference.

A

[SENATE.

committee could do nothing to assist the Senate on the subject.

Mr. LINN suggested the propriety of throwing all such documents into the library. He said he was perfectly willing to do so with his; and would make a motion to that effect to-morrow, unless some other Senator would do so.

Mr. SEVIER said that, if this resolution should not be carried, he should vote that the documents in the possession of the older members should be restored.

Mr. RUGGLES said that those could not be recovered which had been carried away, and some of the Senators would be unwilling to restore what they had received. He thought it was best to serve all alike. It had been said that it was stolen property. If it were so, he was disposed, like the Senator from Arkansas, [Mr. SEVIER,] in regard to the public lands, to take his share of the spoils, whatever might be hereafter.

Mr. BENTON suggested two amendments to the resolution: first, to strike all out, and direct the members who had received such documents to restore them; and if that should fail, he would then move that the Secreta. ry should get the documents at the lowest price for which they could be obtained. He would also move hereafter that each Senator should be furnished with the legislative history of the time during which he should remain in Congress.

On motion of Mr. WALKER, the resolution was laid on the table.

The Senate resumed the consideration of the

LAND BILL.

And the question being on the adoption of the amend. ments to the bill reported from the Committee on the Public Lands

The amendments were read, and Mr. WALKER, chairman of the Land Committee, explained, seriatim, the several points in which the bill, as now reported, differed from the shape in which it had been recommitted. The sum amounted to this: that, instead of requiring occupation and cultivation for two years, in order to a patent, it required only one year; that, in order to a preemption, the land must have been occupied, resided on, and cultivated, prior to the 1st of December, 1836; that a parent must enter land for his children at private sale, and not over two sections for them all, (instead of a section for each child;) and that four quarter-quarter sections might be entered.

Mr. RUGGLES moved to amend the bill in the fourth section, so as to require that the proof of cultivation, &c., by two competent witnesses, should be made "to the satisfaction of the register and receiver," before whom it is to be proved.

The motion was resisted by Mr. WALKER, as being unnecessary, inasmuch as if proof was to be made to any one, it must, of course, be proof to his satisfaction, or the thing was not proved to him.

A long discussion ensued, in which it was insisted by the advocates of the amendment, that, as the bill pointed out how the fact in question was to be proved, viz: by the oath of two competent and disinterested witnesses, unless the amendment should be inserted, all discretion would be taken away from the register and receiver, and he must be obliged to receive an affidavit of two such witnesses as proof of the fact, though he might personally know to the contrary, or though a hundred witnesses should testify the reverse.

A law argument on this point took place between Messrs. BAYARD and BLACK.

Mr. EWING proposed that the inhabitation or cultiva tion itself should be required by the bill, and not the mere proof of it by two witnesses; the mode in which it should be proved might be added, if necessary; but,

as the bill now stood, the fact of inhabitation or cultivation was nowhere required. An affidavit was all that was required. He suggested a modification of the amend ment, so as to effect this object by requiring a "residence for three months prior to the 1st of December, 1836, and that the same be proved before the register and receiver by two disinterested and competent witnesses." But this was rejected, as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Bayard, Calhoun, Clay, Clayton, Crittenden, Davis, Ewing of Ohio, Kent, King of Georgia, Knight, Morris, Niles, Prentiss, Robbins, Ruggles, Southard, Spence, Swift, Tipton, Tomlinson, Wall, Webster, White-23.

NAYS-Messrs. Benton, Black, Brown, Buchanan, Cuthbert, Dana, Ewing of Illinois, Fulton, Grundy, Hendricks, Hubbard, King of Alabama, Linn, Lyon, Moore, Mouton, Nicholas, Norvell, Page, Rives, Robinson, Sevier, Strange, Walker, Wright-25.

The amendment as at first proposed, requiring the proof to be made to the satisfaction of the register and receiver," was then agreed to, as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Bayard, Calhoun, Clayton, Crittenden, Dana, Davis, Ewing of Ohio, Kent, King of Georgia, Knight, Moore, Morris, Niles, Page, Prentiss, Robbins, Ruggles, Southard, Spence, Swift, Tipton, Tomlinson, Wall, White-24.

NAYS-Messrs. Benton, Black, Brown, Buchanan, Cuthbert, Ewing of Illinois, Fulton, Grundy, Hendricks, Hubbard, King of Alabama, Linn, Lyon, Mouton, Nicholas, Norvell, Rives, Robinson, Sevier, Strange, Walker, Wright-22.

Mr. SWIFT proposed to amend the 4th section, so as to provide that no pre-emption be granted to any individual for more than "one legal subdivision" of the public land.

But it was rejected, as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Bayard, Calhoun, Clay, Clayton, Crittenden, Davis, Ewing of Ohio, Kent, King of Georgia, Knight, Morris, Prentiss, Robbins, Ruggles, Southard, Spence, Swift, Tomlinson, Wall, White-20.

NAYS-Messrs. Benton, Black, Cuthbert, Dana, Ewing of Illinois, Fulton, Grundy, Hendricks, Hubbard, King of Alabama, Linn, Lyon, Moore, Mouton, Nicholas, Niles, Norvell, Page, Rives, Robinson, Sevier, Strange, Tipton, Walker, Wright-25.

Mr. RUGGLES moved to amend the 7th section by striking out the clause about quarter-quarter sections, and inserting a provision that all land purchased under the first five sections of the bill should be taken in subdivisions, according to the public surveys; that none should be entered in less than quarter-quarter sections, and in not more than four subdivisions by one individual.

Mr. R. spoke at some length in favor of the amendment, as necessary to prevent purchasers from roaming over the whole public domain, and selecting, in small parcels of 40 acres, all the choice spots, leaving the resi due comparatively valueless. As the bill now stood, a man might enter twenty-one different tracts, in all the States and Territories where the public lands lie.

After a discussion of some length, in which the amend ment was opposed by Messrs. MOORE, BLACK, and WALKER, and defended by the mover and Mr. EWING of Ohio, it was rejected, as follows:

YEAS--Messrs. B.yard, Calhoun, Clay, Clayton, Crittenden, Dana, Davis, Ewing of Ohio, Kent, King of Georgia, Knight, Morris, Prentiss, Preston, Robbins, Ruggles, Southard, Spence, Swift, Tomlinson, Wall, Webster, White-23.

NAYS-Messrs. Benton, Black, Buchanan, Cuthbert, Ewing of Illinois, Fulton, Grundy, Hendricks, Hubbard, King of Alabama, Linn, Lyon, Moore, Mouton, Nicholas,

[FEB. 7, 1837.

Mr. MOORE moved an additional clause, introducing the graduation principle, and securing the pre-emption right of persons who had been deprived of their land by the location thereon of Indian reservations. After a brief discussion, in which Mr. MOORE and Mr. SEVIER took part, the amendment was rejected, as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Benton, Black, Brown, Fulton, Hendricks, King of Alabama, Moore, Morris, Nicholas, Rob. inson, Ruggles, Sevier, Walker, White-14.

NAYS-Messrs. Bayard, Buchanan, Calhoun, Clayton, Cuthbert, Dana, Ewing of Illinois, Ewing of Ohio, Grundy, Hubbard, Kent, King of Georgia, Knight, Linn, Lyon, Mouton, Niles, Norvell, Page, Prentis, Preston, Rives, Southard, Spence, Strange, Swift, Tomlinson, Wall, Wright--29.

Mr. KING, of Georgia, moved, as an amendment in the 4th section, to insert a proviso, "That the applicant shall make oath that he has not received the benefit of any pre-emption law heretofore passed."

Mr. K. stated that the object of this amendment was to break up the business of professional squatters. The object of Congress, he said, was to encourage settlement and cultivation. The restraint on squatting, which was in the 4th section of the bill when recommitted, had been left out in this bill by the committee. This proposition, he said, was unanimously accepted by the committee at the last session.

Mr. BLACK opposed the amendment, because no such restraint on speculators existed.

Mr. WALKER also opposed the amendment, because he could see no reason why a pre-emption right should not be granted in a subsequent case as well as in a preceding.

Mr. MOORE said all the new States were not treated with equal justice by this bill. He had endeavored, by his recent amendment, in part to remedy this injustice in regard to his own State, but it had been voted down.

Mr. KING, of Georgia, said this bill was a great deal worse than when recommitted. It was now not a bill to encourage settlement and cultivation, bat purely to encourage squatting and speculation. He called for the yeas and nays on the question; which were ordered.

Mr. MOORE vindicated his constituents from all opprobrious epithets, and remarked that the bill had been framed by the political friends of the Senator from Georgia.

The amendment was rejected, as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Bayard, Brown, Calhoun, Clayton, Crittenden, Cuthbert, Davis, Ewing of Ohio, Kent, King of Alabama, King of Georgia, Knight, Morris, Prentiss, Robbins, Ruggles, Southard, Swift, Tomlinson, Wall, Webster, White-22.

NAYS-Messrs. Benton, Black, Buchanan, Dana, Ewing of Illinois, Fulton, Grundy, Hendricks, llubbard, Linn, Lyon, Moore, Mouton, Nicholas, Niles, Norvell, Page, Rives, Robinson, Sevier, Strange, Walker, Wright-23.

Mr. KING, of Georgia, moved an amendment in the 4th section, disallowing the occupancy of any land to which the Indian title had been not only extinguished, but from which the Indians had been removed.

On this amendment a debate of some spirit arose, chiefly between the mover and Mr. MOORE, of Alabama, in the course of which some rather sharp things were said, on the one side, respecting the treatment of the Indians by Georgia, and, on the other, of the character of those who had left Georgia to settle on Indian reservations in Alabama.

The amendment was rejected, as follows: YEAS-Messrs. Bayard, Clayton, Davis, Ewing of Ohio, Kent, King of Georgia, Knight, Nicholas, Pren

ster, White-16.

NAYS-Messrs. Benton, Black, Brown, Buchanan, Cuthbert, Dana, Ewing of Illinois, Fulton, Grandy, Hendricks, Hubbard, King of Alabama, Linn, Lyon, Moore, Mouton, Niles, Norvell, Page, Rives, Robinson, Sevier, Strange, Walker, Wright-25.

Mr. EWING, of Ohio, moved to amend the 3d section so as to require a residence of two years, instead of one year. The Senate had agreed to this amendment by a decided vote before.

Mr. GRUNDY said that that had been done when the bill contained the feature of prospective pre-emption. Mr. EWING replied that this had nothing to do with pre-emption, but referred to the regular entry of land by actual settlers.

The amendment was rejected, as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Bayard, Calhoun, Clayton, Davis, Ewing of Ohio, Kent, King of Georgia, Knight, Morris, Prentiss, Robbins, Southard, Swift, Tomlinson, Wall, Webster, White-17.

NAYS-Messrs. Benton, Black, Brown, Buchanan, Cuthbert, Dana, Ewing of Illinois, Fulton, Grundy, Hendricks, Hubbard, King of Alabama, Linn, Lyon, Moore, Mouton, Nicholas, Niles, Norvell, Page, Rives, Robinson, Sevier, Strange, Walker, Wright-26.

Mr. WALKER moved to correct a mistake in the bill, as printed, by inserting within the year 1836, instead of during the year 1836.

It was carried, as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Benton, Black, Brown, Buchanan, Cuthbert, Ewing of Illinois, Fulton, Grundy, Hendricks, Hubbard, King of Alabama, Linn, Lyon, Moore, Mouton, Nicholas, Niles, Norvell, Page, Rives, Robinson, Sevier, Strange, Walker, Wright-25.

NAYS-Messrs. Bayard, Calhoun, Clayton, Davis, Ewing of Ohio, Kent, King of Georgia, Knight, Prentiss, Robbins, Southard, Swift, Tomlinson, Wall, Webster, White-16.

The question now recurring on agreeing, as in Com mittee of the Whole, to the amendment of the Committee on Public Lands, as it had been amended-

Mr. CALHOUN said that the bill, especially since it had been reduced to its present shape, was beneficial neither to the new nor to the old States, and very op. pressive to actual settlers. He should infinitely prefer ceding the lands entirely to the States in which they lie; and, with that view, he hid prepared an amendment in the shape of a substitute for the present bill, and which he now moved. It was sent to the Secretary's table, and read, as follows:

Strike out all after the word "that," in the first line, and insert-

All the public lands within the States of Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas, Missouri, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, and Michigan, with the exceptions of the sites of fortifications, navy and dock yards, arsenals, magazines, and all other public buildings, be ceded to the States within the limits of which they are respectively situated, on the following conditions:

First. That the said States shall severally pass acts, to be irrevocable, that they will annually pay to the United States thirty-three and one third per cent. on the gross amount of the sales of such lands, on or before the first day of February of each succeeding year.

Secondly. That the minimum price, as now fixed by law, shall remain unchanged until the first day of January, eighteen hundred and forty-two; after which time the price of all lands heretofore offered at public sale, and then remaining unsold ten years or upwards, preceding the first day of January aforesaid, may be reduced by said States to a price not less than one dollar per acre; and all lands that may have been offered at public sale, and remaining unsold fifteen years or upwards, preceding the first day of January, eighteen hundred and forty-sev.

[SENATE.

en, may thereafter be reduced by said States to a price not less than seventy-five cents per acre; and all lands that may have been offered at public sale, and remaining unsold twenty years or upwards, preceding the first day of January, eighteen hundred and fifty-two, may then be reduced by said States to a price not less than fifty cents per acre; and all lands that may have been offered at public sale, and remaining unsold twenty years or upwards, preceding the first day of January, eighteen hun. dred and fifty-seven, may thereafter be reduced by said States to a price not less than thirty-five cents per acre; and all lands that may have been offered at public sale, and remaining unsold thirty years or upwards, preceding the first day of January, eighteen hundred and sixty-two, may thereafter be reduced by said States to a price not less than twenty cents per acre; and all lands that shall have been offered at public sale, and remaining unsold thirty-five years or upwards, shall be ceded immediately to the States in which said lands are situated: Provided, That all lands which shall remain unsold, after having been offered at public sale for ten years, and which do not come under the above provisions, shall be subject to the provisions of graduation and cession aforesaid, at the respective periods of ten, fifteen, twenty, twenty-five, thirty, and thirty-five years, after said sale, commencing from the expiration of ten years after the same had been offered at public sale.

Thirdly. That the lands shall be subject to the same legal subdivisions, in the sale and survey, as is now provided by law, reserving for each township the sixteenth section, or the substitute, as heretofore provided by law; and the land not yet offered for sale shall be first offered by the State, at public auction, and be sold, for cash only, in the manner now provided by law; and any land now or hereafter remaining unsold, after the same shall have been offered at public auction, shall be subject to entry, for cash only, according to the graduation which may be fixed by the States, respectively, under the provisions of this act.

Fourthly. This cession, together with the portion of the sales to be retained by the States, respectively, under the provisions of this act, shall be in full of the five per cent. fund, or any part thereof, not already advanced to any State; and the said States shall be exclusively liable for all charges that may hereafter accrue from the surveys, sales, and management of the public lands and extinguishment of Indian title within the limits of said States, respectively.

Fifthly. That on a failure to comply with any of the above conditions, or a violation of the same on the part of any of the said States, the cession herein made to the State failing to comply with or violating said conditions shall be thereby rendered null and void; and all grants or titles thereafter made by said State, for any portion of the public lands within the limits of the same, ceded by this act, shall be and is hereby declared to be null and void, and of no effect whatever.

SEC. 2. And be it further enacted, That whenever the President of the United States shall be officially notified that any of the said States has passed an act in compliance with the above conditions, it shall be his duty to adopt such measures as he shall think proper to close the land offices, including the surveying department, within the limits of said State; and that the commissions of all officers connected therewith shall expire on a day to be fixed by him, but which day shall not be beyond six months from the day he received the official notification of the passage of said act.

SEC. 3. And be it further enacted, That on such notifi. cation being made, the said States shall be relieved from all compacts, acts, or ordinance, imposing restrictions on the right of said State to tax any lands by her authority, subsequent to the sale thereof, ceded by this act; and

all maps, titles, records, books, documents, and papers, in the General Land Office at Washington, relative to said lands, shall be subject to the order and disposition of the Executive of said State.

SEC. 4. And be it further enacted, That all lands of the United States within the limits of the State of Tennessee, with the exceptions enumerated in the first section of this act, shall be, and the same are hereby, ceded to said Slate.

Mr. BENTON objected to any arrangement which extended so far as was proposed by the amendment. We were near another census, when the representation of the new States would be greatly augmented, and they might come into Congress, and write their own terms.

[FEB. 7, 1837.

which should secure to them their homes, and not throw the country into the hands of great capitalists, as had been done in the case of the Holland Land Company, and thus retard the settlement of the West. As to the evasions of previous pre-emption laws, of which so much had been said, he believed they either had no existence in Missouri, or had been grossly exaggerated. In the course of his professional duty [Mr. LINN is a physician, in large practice] he had occasion to become extensively acquainted with the people concerning whom these things had been asserted, (he referred to the emigrants who had settled in that State under the pre-emption law of 1814,) and he could say nothing of the kind had fallen under his observation. They had come there, in the most cases, poor, surrounded by all the evils and disadvantages of emigration to a new country; he had attended many of them in sickness; and he could truly aver that they were, as a whole, the best and most upright body of people he had ever known.

Mr. BLACK was willing to take up the amendment as a substantive measure, independently of the present bill, but not as an amendment to it. He was not prepared to say whether it proposed a good bargain to Mississippi or not; but however that might be, he could not vote for it now. If the pending bill was to fall, it should be by some other means than the interposition of a proposal of this character.

Mr. KING, of Georgia, would vote for the substitute now proposed, in preference to the bill before the Senate. He believed it would be a hundred thousand times better for the people of the United States. He recognised the principles stated by the Senator from Pennsylvania, and he only regretted that that gentleman had not thought of them a little sooner, so as to apply them to the present bill.

Mr. WALKER said he should vote for the amend. ment with pleasure: the object it proposed was dear to every new State. It would put them on an equal footing with the other States of the Union; and, much as he was in favor of the pending bill, he should infinitely prefer the substitute. Come from friend of foe, it should have his most decided support, and he returned his thanks to the Senator from South Carolina for having introduced it.

Mr. LINN said he should be sorry if a majority were found to substitute the amendment for the pending bil', for he was well persuaded that then both would be lost. He might probably vote for it as an independent proposition, but could not as it now stood. He had set out with the determination to vote against every amendment which should be proposed, as the bill had once been nearly lost by the multiplication of them. If this amend ment should be received, the residue of the session would be taken up in discussing it, and nothing would be done for his constituents. He wanted them to know that he had done his utmost, which was but little, to carry into effect their wishes, and to secure their best interests in the settlement of the new country. He was anxious to obtain the passage of an equitable pre-emption law,

Mr. SEVIER said that, like the Senator from Mississippi, [Mr. WALKER,] he here returned his thanks to the honorable Senator from South Carolina for the proposi tion he had brought forward. It had been from the beginning well known to all the friends of the bill now before the Senate that that bill had never been a favorite of his. The only feature in it concerning which he felt any solicitude had been stricken out; and though he had promised its friends that he would lend them his help in making it as perfect as they could, (and to the very last prized them that, when the bill came to the final vote, he should vote against it. He was prepared to go for the substitute proposed by the Senator from South Car. olina. Nor did he consider, that substitute as being at all at war with the principles of the bill. He regretted that the amendment had not been printed in time, so that its provisions might have been better understood. He was very sure, from what had been said by the Senator from Pennsylvania, [Mr. BUCHANAN,] that that gentleman had misapprehended the nature of the bill. It did not propose, as he seemed to imagine, to give away the public lands to any body, but it pointed out a way in which the General Government would get clear of all the embarrassment connected with those lands, and would realize thirty-three and a third per cent. of their entire value. It was a proposition very different from those which had preceded it, and it was the only measure which would give full and final satisfaction to the people of the West. There was a spirit there which even the bill now before the Senate could never satisfy. They wanted the control of the soil within their own limits, and with nothing short of this could they ever rest content. They did not come here, and demand it as a right, but they earnestly desired it, and would most heartily rejoice should any mode be devised by which they could lawfully obtain it. They were freemen, and desired the exercise of sovereignty over their own soil. This was the object they set before them, and for it Mr. S. should never cease to exert himself, so long as he retained a seat on that floor. What did the amendment propose? To throw away the public lands? By no means. But to get clear of all the cumbersome machinery and complicated and expensive system which at present existed, and which had been accompanied with so much vexation and dispute in both Houses of Congress, and to give up the land, for a fair equivalent, to the States within which it lay, that they might dispose of it for themselves, and in their own way. They would of course be concerned to see that the land brought a good price, for they were in themselves to realize two thirds of the proc' eds. The remaining third they were to pay to Government, in clear money, and it would be more than the Government had ever netted since they held the domain.

The amendment proposed that which had long been a favorite subject with his constituents. He referred to the principle of graduation. This system had first been started by the honorable Senator from Missouri, [Mr. BENTON.] To that gentleman belonged the honor of having first proposed it; and, for having done so, Mr. S. here returned to him his most heartfelt acknowledg. ments. It had endeared that Senator to multitudes in the West. They called their counties after him; they called their towns after him; they gave his name to their children; and it had secured to him an influence which nothing else could have obtained for him. The Western people had gazed upon his proposition with admiration and delight. They had the terms of it by heart. But the measure now proposed went even beyond this. The Senator from Mississippi, however, was apprehensive that it would endanger the bill. To Mr. S. this was no very formidable objection. But he would here say to that Senator, that if, when a proposal of this kind was brought forward, the men of the West refused to put their shoulders to the wheel, they never need expect to get the benefit, especially when it was brought forward by those who represented the older States. They had surely a right to calculate on the votes of the new States in its favor. Come from what quarter it might, he, for one, stood ready to advocate it. It was as good for the General Government as it was for the West. It got that Government at once clear of all its difficulties with the Indians, and it forever delivered it from squatters, pre-emption rights, and all. If the terms of this arrangement, when they should become known to the American people, would not be found acceptable, as well to the people of the old as the new States, he was greatly mistaken, indeed. He was for the amendment. Let who would vote against it, he would vote for it.

Mr. BENTON made some remarks, which were very imperfectly heard at our reporter's station in the chamber. He was, however, understood to say that he had brought forward a proposition of this general character some years ago; and it appeared, from what had just been stated, that the population of the West approved of the exertions he had made to carry it through; and if there were any votes or voices more decidedly against it than the rest, it was the vote and the voice of the gentleman from South Carolina. We were now within less than three years of the period for taking the new census, and after that time the State of Arkansas would enjoy three or four times her present weight in the councils of the nation. By that time we should probably have three new States: two on the Mississippi, and one on the Gulf of Mexico; while the representation of the new States already in the Union would be greatly enlarged. If the Senator from Arkansas would but restrain his impatience until that period should arrive, the West would settle this question of the public lands just as it pleased. They would settle this matter as they would settle the presidency; and the older States must look to them for both. He was not going to surrender advantages like these for thirty years to come, for the sake of the propo sition now advanced. He! he who had introduced this measure; he who had originated it; he who had fought it up, was not going to suffer himself to be forestalled by any thirty years bargain. In three years more, they could write their own terms, and lay them on the table of the Senate. They would be bid for, and bid deeply for, by every candidate for the presidency; and no gentleman, by casting reproaches on him, should cause him, in the least degree, to swerve from his course. He had thus far been able to make himself intelligible to his own people, and he hoped still to be able to do so; and he should retain his position in patience, until Missouri, instead of having two, would have fourt en members in the other House.

[SENATE.

Mr. SEVIER said that, if he could get better terms for the West than those now proposed, he would gladly do so. But he thought the Senator from Missouri misapprehended the terms that had been offered. The graduation clause in the amendment did indeed speak of terms of twenty and thirty years; but not of twenty or thirty years from the present time, but from the time the land had been proclaimed for sale. Now, in respect to some of them, that period had already elapsed; and, in regard to others, it was near at hand. It might be very true that presidential candidates would bid deep for the favor of the West, but that was no reason why the West should refuse a good offer when it was made. The present bill, he repeated it, would not satisfy the West; nor would the West ever be satisfied until the lands within their limits were, on terms of some sort, actually ceded to them. Here was a proposition to cede them, and he should vote for it.

Mr. LINN observed that, while the process of forming new States was going on, and the representation in Congress of new States already existing was rapidly augmenting, it ought not to be forgotten that the number of old States was also increasing, and that, consequently, the representatives who were in favor of the interests of the old States were becoming more numerous. Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, and others, would soon be among the list of old States, and their influence would be exerted accordingly. Mr. L. said he was a practical man, though his temperament might be somewhat warm. He looked to things which were attainable, and in the near prospect of being obtained, rather than at those contingent and distant. Here was a bill, far advanced in the Senate, and, as he hoped, on the eve of passing. He believed it would secure a great good to his constituents; and he could not consent to risk that bill by accepting the amendment proposed by the Senator from South Carolina. If the Senator from Arkansas would let this go, he might possibly find that it was a better thing than he could ever get again. He wanted that Congress should so regulate the public lands, and so arrange the terms on which it was disposed of, as to furnish in the West an opportunity for poor men to become rich, and every worthy and industrious man prosperous and happy.

Mr. MOORE said that, having heard the bill but imperfectly once read, he did not know as much of it as he wished to know previous to acting upon it. So far as he understood the amendment, he was for it. It seem ed strange to him that the two Senators from Missouri should entertain such different views as to the prospects of the West. The Senator nearest him [Mr. BENTON] had very confidently predicted that, in three years, the people of the West would be able to make their own terms; while his colleague, on the contrary, seemed to think that the West would never again get as good a bill as that now before the Senate. He could not reconcile these two prophecies. However, he was not much in the habit of being governed by prophecies uttered in Congress. He thought the amendment offered better terms than had ever been presented to the West before. It was no new doctrine, however, that the new States were entitled to the jurisdiction of their own soil; and the constitution certainly looked to the time when those States would be free indeed, and no longer vassals under the control of this Governmen', through the public lands. This happy emancipation the amendment proposed im mediately to accomplish. As to the payment of thirtythree and a third per cent. of the proceeds, it might, so far as money was concerned, turn out to be no very good bargain for the new States. But it would certainly be a very good one for the General Government, in a pecuniary as well as every other view. It would give that Government more money for the public lands than they would ever be able to realize on any other plan.